1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Norwegian (Bokmål)
  4. >
  5. "Hunden spiser ikke osten."

"Hunden spiser ikke osten."

Translation:The dog does not eat the cheese.

July 9, 2015



Would it sound different if the sentence was "Hun spiser ..."? I would have sworn she doesn't eat the cheese, and even after several replays I can't hear anything else :s


There should be a small difference with the ending -n sound. Hunden is pronounced with an extra -n, that is slightly higher in pitch: "Hun-n". Hun does not have this, and the pronunciation is in one even tone.

However, "Hun" and "hund" (singular, undetermined) are pronounced the same, so in this case the meaning would have to be shown in context.


Thanks for your explanation! I understand the difference in pronunciation, although it will take some getting used to ;)


No problem! Hehe, it is a distinction that is rather preferable to know ;)


I was wondering whether you could leave 'the' away in translating 'osten'. Is it possible to say 'the dog does not eat cheese' instead of 'the dog does not eat THE cheese'?


You could say that and I think it's correct but in this case that's not the accurate translation of the sentence. I think that if you say in that way you are saying that the dog doesn't eat cheese in general. In the exercise he doesn't eat that specific cheese.


I know a dog who eats cheese by the way...


How does one differentiate between 'the dog is not eating the cheese' - meaning not right now and 'the dog does not eat ( the) cheese' - meaning never?


Same way as in English? Remove the "the" in the sentence - like Johannie & Ana discussed in the other comment (above)... i.e. "Hunden spiser ikke ost"


That still doesn't work though. The question is around tense, rather than which specific cheese. So how can you tell the difference between "the dog is not eating cheese" and "the dog does not eag cheese" or as in this exercise "the dog is not eating the cheese" or "the dog does not eat the cheese"


It would usually be clear from from context but you could always clarify by rewording if necessary. On its own the Norwegian sentence is ambiguous


I have the same question about the tense, forgive me if it is evident from the previous comments, but what difference would be there in Norwegian between "the dog isn't eating the cheese" and "the dog doesn't eat the cheese". I encountered the same problem earlier and still can't grasp the difference:(


I don't think the 'the' before the cheese is really neccessary.


The lesson is called "Definites". So, in this case, it is necessary. (๑・v・๑)


Why is "ikke" not at the end of the sentence here? I read in a different skill that putting "ikke" at the end of a sentence negates the sentence entirely, which is surely what it's doing here as well.


why is "The dog is not eating the cheese." wrong? I don't really see the difference between is eating and eats...
